33 replies to this topic

[Lazarus Long]

Here is a more astute description of neoliberal international policy.

http://en.wikipedia....ional_relations
Neoliberal international relations thinkers often employ game theory to explain why states do or do not cooperate;[1] since their approach tends to emphasize the possibility of mutual wins, they are interested in institutions which can arrange jointly profitable arrangements and compromises.

Neoliberalism is a response to Neorealism; while not denying the anarchic nature of the international system, neoliberals argue that its importance and effect has been exaggerated. The neoliberal argument is focused on the neorealists' underestimation of "the varieties of cooperative behavior possible within... a decentralized system."[2] Both theories, however, consider the state and its interests as the central subject of analysis; Neoliberalism may have a wider conception of what those interests are.

Neoliberalism argues that even in an anarchic system of autonomous rational states, cooperation can emerge through the building of norms, regimes and institutions.

In terms of the scope of international relations theory and foreign interventionism, the debate between Neoliberalism and Neorealism is an intra paradigm one, as both theories are positivist and focus mainly on the state system as the primary unit of analysis.

[inawe]

I just read these 2 pieces which can be grouped together under the title: The Audacity of Writing Too Much.
Pierre Tristam in his critique could have saved space and just write his last phrase. "I's the two-party system, triumphant."
The sociopolitical environment in the US is so constraint that it doesn't leave much space to maneuver.
No politician can even hint that s/he is ready to accept the US is a great power but not the leader of the (free?) world. In order to be
the leader we have to project our power everywhere. And bribe foreign leaders. $50 billion?
Anybody who proposes to reduce the military budget and contract the armed forces is politically dead. Almost as bad as not wearing the
American flag in the lapel.
The ultra right wing has managed to redefine "liberal" and give it a bad connotation. Then it is labeling Obama as the second most liberal
member of Congress. In the same axis of evil as Kennedy. So Obama has to push hard to the right. Even if it costs him a hernia.
"Obama is going out of his way to sound tough, nationalistic ..." Of course. What else can he do?
Pierre Tristam, you seem to be to the left of what's in that manifesto. So what are you going to do? Vote for McCain?

[Iam Empathy]

I just read these 2 pieces which can be grouped together under the title: The Audacity of Writing Too Much.
Pierre Tristam in his critique could have saved space and just write his last phrase. "I's the two-party system, triumphant."
The sociopolitical environment in the US is so constraint that it doesn't leave much space to maneuver.
No politician can even hint that s/he is ready to accept the US is a great power but not the leader of the (free?) world. In order to be
the leader we have to project our power everywhere. And bribe foreign leaders. $50 billion?
Anybody who proposes to reduce the military budget and contract the armed forces is politically dead. Almost as bad as not wearing the
American flag in the lapel.
The ultra right wing has managed to redefine "liberal" and give it a bad connotation. Then it is labeling Obama as the second most liberal
member of Congress. In the same axis of evil as Kennedy. So Obama has to push hard to the right. Even if it costs him a hernia.
"Obama is going out of his way to sound tough, nationalistic ..." Of course. What else can he do?
Pierre Tristam, you seem to be to the left of what's in that manifesto. So what are you going to do? Vote for McCain?

Well-said

[luv2increase]

The Audacity of Writing Too Much.

It is obvious that you are the prospective audience of peripheral advertising because you don't like to analyze information. It is too much work for you. You'd rather have someone else do the dirty work for you, even if it means they didn't do it right. That is sad.